also coal and oil energy can be cleaned up significantly thru expensive filtering processes. not unlike the insurance companies with "real" health care, anything that cuts into the oil co.'s profits is contested by enough money to just go ahead and change.
corporate profits are more important than protecting a planet 6 billion of us currently live on.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Uhg, what a fucking liar. Republicans aren't letting Big Oil "keep ALL their profits." Exxon payed 10s of billions of dollars in tax money.
If you don't like the high gas prices, then blame these fucking liberal retards not letting us drill in ANWR.
Here's the deal liberals, if you want to save the world from Global Warming, then accept the consequences. Otherwise, shut the fuck up and fill your truck.
this guy is a closet lazy stinking asshole who hates work.what the fuck is wrong with his brain,taxing the oil dudes will fuck us all in the ass with high prices!!fucking idiot,pull your head out of your ass motherfucker!!!
Great clip guys. Just about every expert agrees we wouldn't see a single drop of oil for 7-10 years if we ramped up domestic drilling today, and that AT BEST we'd see a decrease in the price of gas of 1-10 cents per gallon.
there are 5 ways to bring down prices. 1. CARPOOL. if 5 folks are driven in a car usually driven by 1, there would be 4 less cars on our highways. 2. get the govt. to spend money on MASS TRANSIT. if you make public transportation comfortable, affordable, and attractive you could get many americans out of their cars. 3. get the govt to EXPAND AMTRAK and to 48 states, and call it the national rail system.
I can see both points of views in either party. I tend to incline a little bit towards approving the drilling here and now until we find other solutions. Together with wind, solar (with incentive & energy buy back program) & nuclear.
Question: Why the democrats do not agree on reducing/getting rid of the gas taxes during the summer time as the republican proposed?. Have you guys found out how much in gas taxes are paid (in percentage) to the govmnt.?
Why should we punish the oil companies?They don't control the price of oil, but since the price is so high why shouldn't they take advantage. What if the price of shoes all of the sudden skyrocketed?Would you wan't to all of the sudden tell nike to screw off and give you back some of that money that they earned?Just because somebody took a chance a few of decades ago and started an oil company,not knowing what would happen,turns out that investment was a good one.You want to take that from them?
It's not about the oil. It's about control. It's about keeping us in the dark.
The powers-that-be know that there's plenty of oil, but continuing to use it will eventually kill the planet.
The future is in clean energies like hydrogen, wind and solar. Right now, harnessing those energies is free (can't have that!); and corporations are biding their time (making all the money they can) so that they can figure out a way to own the sun, the wind and the rain.
the problem is that we cannot utilize alternative energy and replace our current resources for at least a decade if not a quarter of a century. So we need to drill now so we are not paying 10 to 15 dollars a gallon of gas in 3 years. Forcing our economy to suffer in order to find a more efficient source of energy is just plain moronic. We American's are smart and well find a new way. The fact is: Nothing, so far, is as efficient as oil and naatural gas.
Most everybody who posted a comment before me appears to be a Republican. I bet most of you or your parents or grandparents are also republican. Indeed, the Republican party has destroyed America. We can still take America back by electing a Democrat this year. You Oil company loving Republicans who dont have a clue whats it like to work for minimum wage have also contributed to the destruction of this Great Country. Our Lord Jesus Christ will always be there to protect us from greedy people.
Firs of all, I do not have money. I am a father of two and barely make enough money to get by. Second of all protecting the American Constitution and limiting government cannot be catogorized as destroying America. Democrats want to expand government, give handouts, and dictate a so called free market. WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO WORKING FOR WHAT YOU WANT. THE GOVERNMENT WORKS FOR US WE DON'T WORK FOR THEM. THIS IS THE LAND OF MILK AND HONEY. READ THE CONSTITUTION.
no sir you are absolutely wrong. the founding fathers intended for tariffs to pay govt expenses not income taxes. but the last 20 years we have managed to destroy that notion with free trade and outsourcing.(which is not good for the economy). another note this north american union is unconstitutional.
This is great. While the Democratic majority bitches about high prices at the pump, what do they do? They vote down a bill to drill in ANWR to gain access to a whole bunch of reserves to perhaps drive DOWN gas prices, and they submit a stupid bill that would just raise costs for oil companies and thus raise costs for consumers. Basic economics would tell anyone this simple fact. Who else is big oil gonna pass these costs onto? They're not take it lying down.
50 to 70 percent already comes from the western hemisphere. north america is already 3rd top producer of crude. only about 25 percent is imported form the middle east. more drilling here will not drive prices down. oversight(which there is none), and requiring futures traders to take possession of the commodities they buy will drive prices down.
So, Cenk, according to your logic, they were supposed to pass a stupid bill that would've choked oil companies even further, despite all the rules and regulations that make their costs extremely high and make it almost impossible to build new refineries here? That's madness! And for what? For political points?
There are NO record profits! You people are confusing profits with sales. If costs rise, prices rise, but the only way they can have record profits is if they price gouged.
I'm not the biggest friend of corporate America or the oil companies, but the claim that they're making "record profits" is ludicrous. First of all, most people who say this are looking at SALES and revenue, which are very diff. from profits. Profits result from having to pay for costs after you get your revenue. Profits oftentimes are much less than sales, like in Wal-Mart's case. They make 360 billion a year but only get $11 billion in profits.
i believe he is right that the move was dumb politically, yet i do believe that the republicans were correct in killing the bill due to its economic interference...taxing the oil companies isn't the right way to fix the problem, imho.
Remember this on voting day that the Republicans and the Oil companies are one and the same. Vote them all out. A vote for a Republican is a vote for ten dollar a gallon gas.
This guy is an idiot. The Republicans just kept the price of gas lower. If I ran an oil company and I got hit with a windfall tax the first thing I would do is raise my prices to cover the tax. How stupid are the Democrats? The Democrats lead with emotion and over no solutions.
and how would they raise prices? that's called price gouging, and they would be slapped hard on the wrist to do so. the only way gas prices would rise is if oil prices went higher (which are set by the futures market, not the oil companies), or refineries started to shut down or reached max capacity. the oil companies would have no way to raise the price of gas if absurd profits were taken away, that's just a myth told by the oil companies.
So you are admitting that the Oil Company's aren't price gouging or price fixing. Glad you understand that. Also, the Oil company's aren't the most profitable companies out there when comparing their Revenue with Net Income. There for there shouldn't be a windfall tax.
of course, that's not to say the price of oil isnt being manipulated at the moment, but the oil companies or the president have little fault for that (not to say our president doesnt have blame, there is plenty of that to go around). however, to say they arent the "most profitable" is absurd, as they are making historical figures at the moment. you cant get MORE profitable in terms of actual dollar figures.
Glad to see you have some clue and don't just blame bush or the oil company's for the situation. I personally think it is the Oil Future Traders that are causeing this along with the turmoil in the middle east. The Oil Co's do have record Dollar Profits. There is no qustion about that but their net income isn't out of line with their revenue. That ratio is what determines a business' profitablity and yes other companies earn more net income on their revenue than Exxon.
I hate to break it to you, but there are no "absurd profits." Profits actually only account for a small portion of revenue. Sure, Exxon made $40 billion one year recently, but that just means their profits were way less, esp. since Wal-Mart makes 360 billion a year but profits are only $11 billion.
The profits really aren't that huge. That's just a Democratic talking point gone wild, to use oil companies as the sole scapegoat for our gas prices problem.
what part of "record profits" do you interpret into "aren't that huge?" And if you are making record profits, you would justify massive subsidies and tax breaks to big oil how? And your solution isn't to reduce our oil addiction by developing alternatives, but to ravage some of the last unspoiled wilderness in this country to keep oil going for another 20 years? When they've already said it wouldn't be online for 7 years, and would add less than 1 percent to available oil?
I never said I was for subsidies or tax breaks for Big Oil. I hate corporate welfare. But show me which sources you're referring to about ANWR, cuz I'm sure I could show you just as many OTHER sources that say it would be a boon for us. Besides, why not at least try and get some of that oil if there, in fact, is a lot?
Of course alternative energy must be a priority, but that'll take at least a decade, if not more, to get on the ground and ready as normal fuel.
They probably are cashing out as new technologies come up on the horizon.Oil will be less and less consumed as better biofuels and batteries come to market.
taking away profits is one thing, but there was a clause in that bill that would have made it harder for speculators to enter the market. these investment bankers are screwing EVERYONE again. enough is enough! it's not pure captalism that has failed us, it's america's coperate captalism which will destory the world eocnomy.
The clauses you are referring to are 2 amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act. They would have done it years ago if they were viable amendments, or if they REALLY wanted the change.
Even Dems understand that making specific restrictions to only oil speculators, could have disastrou effects, AND it is difficult to justify applying to only one industry.
Especially an industry that is a cash cow for Dem socialized entitlement programs.
It's rare that I side with a NeoCon, but they are right about this one. We should treat the oil companies as national treasures. You know what the profit margin was at last report for Exxon-Mobil? 11%. If you want more of something, you want it to more profitable than that!
So this maroon is agog because the Republicans didn't pander to people's ignorance properly.
I agree about the subsidies though. Also do away with the 30 billion going to farmers for not growing food. That's scandalous.
Seriously, if the Republicans are running towards a cliff, why would you want to stop them? Let them all jump off and die. Good riddance. I'm not going to warn them about anything or tell them they're doing wrong.
If any Republicans are reading this, know that I am just kidding. There is no cliff. Keep walking. No need to worry now. Just keep going.
What I've seen the Oil Companies do here in Houston is sickening.
I've owned & operated my own company & a major objective was to keep costs down.
But I've seen the oil companies down here throw lavish parties where they pick people up in limos, spend ridiculous amounts, give unbelievable bonuses & raises & retirement packages of many tens of thousands, let some Exec retire with a bonus + benefits totaling about $500,000,000.00.
Please tell me what a tax on "big oil" would do for us. Is that going to increase producion? No. What we need to do is increase production by allowing drilling in AK and off the coast of CA and FL.
He's more worried with "political stragegy" and how Republicans "might look" than he is with really solving a problem. Basic economics people...to lower prices, quantity must go up. My suggestion would be to take a basic economics course and then discuss the issue before you make yourself look
"What we need to do is increase production by allowing drilling in AK and off the coast of CA and FL."
Major talking point which overlooks the lack of oversight and irresponsible leadership that got us into the situation. Address the problems that got us here and then implement solutions. Otherwise you will perpetuate the same mindset which caused the problems.
the billions of dollars could be used for research into renewable sources , subsidies for alternative energy, and job creation in greener energy fields. look at china, the people there only pay $3 a gallon because the government can flip the bill for the rest since they're smart enough not to waste half their budget on war and occupation of countries around the globe.
It's not a fight we can win. Whatever rules we come up with they will keep fleecing the American public no matter what because they control they oil which we need.
It would be nice if these guys developed a bit of a social conscience but it's a company not a person, you can't really expect them to have human feelings. If they have to choose between going green and seriously denting their profits or making a cheap ad to appear green, that's an easy choice.
Yes, Erato99, the government legally taxes companies. What is going on that the big oil companies are making this much money when we can barely afford their product? Where is this money coming from and where is it going? It needs to be regulated so they can't feel free to price gouge the American people and walk away with billions in profit.
Forgive me if I don't understand correctly, but is this guy think that the government should just go into the oil businesses and take their money (illegal)? Or just tax the shit out of big oil, because then they will definitely lower gas prices, right? Tell Congress to let us use our own oil reserves to lower prices while we find an alternative fuel. Besides, the Chinese are already drilling just outside our borders.
It is part of congress's job to exercise oversight in such cases and windfall profits should raise suspicion. By the way, conservative ideologues under Reagan/Bush used tax reforms as a way to cut social programs. Bush has taken this approach one step further, subsidizing big business even when it pinches the average American and then crying about the need for off-shore drilling (major talking point). It is basically the same philosophy.
Bush is so good he double the gas price by 4 years!!Bush is so good the Iraq war went longer the world war II!! who ever vote for Bush you just got served and you are dumb ass
It doesn't matter. There are no implications for the Republicans until the Democrats have a veto-proof majority. The electoral map favors the Republicans so much that winning the presidency is HIGHLY unlikely. The Republicans know this, so they're just doing what they want, regardless of how unpopular it is because they know that, as long as McCain wins (and he probably will, since he's polling strong in Florida), they can keep things deadlocked, retaining the status quo. They're pretty cynical.
I like that you distinguished between a filibuster and a vote against the bill. I feel that the Republicans have been given a complete pass with their use of the filibuster- by the media simply characterizing it as "opposition" instead of a last-resort, progress-stopping action- and by the Democrats, for not forcing them to filibuster for any significant length of time, exposing their tactics to public scrutiny.
Cenk, I usually agree with you but I think taxing these oil companies is a great idea. You see, these oil companies are making a profit off of something America NEEDS!!! Now, if they were providing a service like Microsoft Windows then I could understand not taxing them for insane profits.
But farmers need gas to harvest crops, truckers need gas to deliver goods to the market place, etc.
No one NEEDS Windows Vista. They can go with Mac or whatever.
Um, hello! That's how this country works. Would you like to work without pay? Didn't think so. Maybe WalMart shouldn't make a profit either... I mean, we all need toilet paper, don't we. Come on people... get smart.
Stay informed people. Do not listen to these politicians, legislators. Do your research. Turn the tv off and look at Congressional voting records, read historical accounts by their aides, look at which taxes go to what. Just looking at what bills pass and their language will give you lots of real information.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
How dumb is this YoungTurk idiot to actually say that oil companies keep ALL of their profits?
Obama just stated today that he would like gas prices to go up, just not too fast. Bloomberg said that gas prices should go up so consumers will stop using as much gas. McCain himself is FOR windfall profits taxing, cap/trade, etc... along with a few Republicans.
Democrats and many Republicans want gas prices to go HIGHER! They KNOW that WPT raises gas prices and decreases tax revenue.
I don't think I can post links, so just copy/paste this in YT search: "Obama: Higher Oil Prices Are Good? What???"
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
According to Barack Obama, high gas prices don't really constitute a problem for Americans. He stated yesterday that the reason for our anger is the rapid increase in prices, not the prices themselves.
This is not dumb on part of the Republicans. The oil companies are what puts food on their table. If they don't act in the favor of the oil company, they might be hurt in other ways.
If you tell oil companies that they won't be able to keep their profits past a certain point (Windfall Profits Tax), they'll make money right up until that point, and then they'll stop.
antimarx: Money transfer are what are taxed under the U.S. tax system. That is the way the tax system works. The way to solve the problem is to cease all taxation of corporations and tax LT capital gains as ordinary income. That would aid in the creation of an adversarial posture of gov't toward the corporate sector overall.
Fine, an overhaul of the system as we know it has nothing to do with only installing a WPT AS PROPOSED by Dems and promoted by this video.
You, from the beginning, have been attempting to argue a point that hasn't been brought up by gov at this point.
Your fantasy of massive overhauls and massive increases of centralized government is no more insightful than Ron Paul pushing for a return to gold standard.
antimarx: For some reason, you seem to be focusing on my statements about other fixes to the current economic mess as if those statements undercut the fact that a wpt would work fine. If you want to try to disingenuously muddle the argument, I suppose that's one way to avoid the fact that there's not a single shred of evidence to say a wpt wouldn't work just fine. There's no reason to reward Big Oil for profits it's reaping that have nothing to do with good management, innovation, etc.
This is way to beat John McCain and the GOP. Read EVERY little thing that he and they voted for that was against assisting the American people in economic troubles
Uhh...not to nitpick here, but..the spartans didn't all die. Just 300 of them, there was still 10,000 of them at the end of the movie...and then didn't run off a cliff...they sort of got flanked and arrowed to death....I'm a nerd.
Your list can be explained very easily: the oil companies produced less oil and raised taxes to increase demand and make up for what they lost to taxation. And it was they, not the government, that cut all those jobs, to further maximize profit. It's not the government or the policy that caused these issues, but the gree of Big Oil.
Vaderwalks, you didn't provide an explanation, you simply repeated the results (I mentioned) of the previously attempted Windfall Profits Tax. Which will soon to be repeated.
BTW, if you label "greed" as 8.3% profit, then you've labeled MANY companies as "greedy".
And also BTW, all taxes get passed on to consumers and investors (including your 401K and such). This is a fact. Accept it.
antimarx: In fact, his explanation made a lot of sense. Nor do you even know that based on the previous history you mention, that those same outcomes would occur. They might or might not. A WPT plus a vigorous enforcement of antitrust laws particularly against vertical integration, and against any further large oil company mergers, would be useful. Investigating whether speculation is being purposely engaged in in order to prompt, e.g., ANWAR exploration, would be good.
antimarx: Lol, are you university-educated? Didn't think so. "The historical effects of WPT prove basic economic facts." The history of WPT is too sparse to prove anything, lol. I'm "mixing separate components," as you put it, because economic outcomes are NEVER based on one factor alone. The economy is an extremely complex piece of machinery, involving a whole host of factors, including investor psychology, just to name one that is almost unquantifiable.
The discussion and video was about Republicans blocking a specific proposal, WPT.
I'm not sure why you want to convolute what has been proposed (WPT) with what YOU are proposing (changing numerous other factors), hence your "mythical" proposal that doesn't exist.
So far you seem to be the prime example of a semi-educated bonehead that can't see the forest for the trees.
antimarx: As for: "I'm not sure why you want to convolute what has been proposed (WPT) with what YOU are proposing" You have continually made over-simplistic statements regarding the effects of a WPT. I have replied to those assertions by showing that things don't work that way, that in fact, there are any number of other factors that have effects on possible outcomes. In other words, you're wrong, you can't rely on a sparse historical record, etc. Go take an ECON course, please.
antimarx: (2) But, apart from the workings of the economy, let's go one step further. I sense you don't want a "socialistic" oil industry (or economy in general). But this isn't about the general economy nor a "free market principle." Rather it is about cronyism between a president and his fam who have had close ties to the oil biz for like 90 years.
Politicians have "close ties" to most any aspect of the economy. Gore has made millions on carbon credit schemes, Obama has a history of "close ties" to his quick "rise" to power (and will have many socialized paypacks), the list goes on and on.
Who the hell isn't invested in oil in one way or the other?
antimarx: "Politicians have 'close ties' to most any aspect of the economy." I'm afraid you have simply lost your footing here. You're trying to dilute the argument with some sort of new meaning for "close ties." In fact, reasonable people understand the meaning of close and distant, proximal and distal. The Bush family has been in the oil biz forever.
I would never defend BUSH, I despise his politics. BUT you attempting to single him out as more relevant to the economy is remarkably dumb.
It is not ones actual "ties" it is the power and control they have on you. Obama is a perfect example of being controlled like a puppet from the beginning of his career to present by special interests.
Obama attempting to lessen the perception of that is only politics.
antimarx: Lol, it's hard to imagine that Bush would NOT have significant influence over many aspects of responses to high oil prices. He's got direct connections to those folks and certainly it is in his personal interest to prevent them from losing any profits. All politicians are somewhat "connected," but Obama's are fairly sparse, nothing like Bush and Cheney, and their tremendous involvement in contruction, oil tool mfg, oil exploration, etc. There's no comparison.
antimarx: (2) Samuel Prescott Bush, great-grandfather of G.W. Bush, became prominent in the oil tool biz. Later, his grandson, George H. W. Bush became a millionaire in the oil biz in West Texas, later moving Zapata Oil co. to Houston, the center of the oil biz in Texas. James Baker, a key advisor to the Bush family sits on the board of Exxon, as an example.
antimarx: (3) I.e., the Bush fam are closely connected to the oil biz and to oil tool mfr's. As such, G W. Bush, along with Cheney, have been able to favor their friends, and, in general, to act in the best interests of Big Oil. That is, again, the game is fixed by virtue of favoritism, cronyism, etc., something for which the Bush admin has become well-known.
Of course politicians work in their own best interest. It is a corrupt system. Singling out Bush is moronic.
All of these corrupt politicians want to keep the US supply low on oil. It is that simple. Democrats and republicans are on the environmental carbon credit scheme which is lining their pockets as we speak.
antimarx: Actually, singling out Bush is sensible and ignoring the obvious is naive. The guy would be in the dock if it were not for the fact he's more useful politically as an unindicted crook who is twisting in the wind! Access to oil spigots in Iraq was one of the reasons for the invasion, and the desirability of that access was on Bush's mind _before_ 911. The scenario being played out is somewhat like that of Aramco in Saudi Arabia; i.e., we're after the oil concessions.
You moron, I almost decided early on not to educate you, but continued the schooling. Now I realize you are a "war for oil" and "inside job" nutjob, and realize there is no way to fix you.
Get a job/education/life/etc.., and get back to me.
anti: you're starting to go over the edge again. If you had confined your remarks to oil instead of jumping into a 911 rant, then you would have an argument. The war was entered into for a variety of reasons, a big one of which was being able to get those oil concessions, as we once had in Saudi Arabia. Greenspan talked about this in his book. And in fact, the doc Bush's War talks about the competition between the neocons and big oil people when the war was being planned. don't be so naive.
antimarx: (3) I.e., what you've got NOW is NOT a free-market process - it's a fixed game. It is highly likely that speculators in cahoots with big oil have bid up oil prices so that American legislators are much more likely to approve ANWAR drilling, etc. I don't like conspiracy theories, but no one can quite figure out why oil should shoot up like it has; the Chinese are expanding, but not quite that fast. So, don't fall for the arguments against a WPT - those profits are ill-gotten gains.
Peak oil; oil production is falling in practically all fields, including Ganwar and Mexico's supergiant field (can't remember the name, but it's the second largest field in the world).
Speculation definitely plays a large role, but oil is a limited resource, and production is falling. Look up "peak oil" for some startling info.
muag: Appreciate the comment, but I just don't believe in peak oil, at least any time soon. There are bazillions of barrels of oil in reserves under Iraq and Iran. As time passes, there are new technologies for extraction that were not available even 20 years ago. Oil companies have always pleaded for special treatment because they search for a non-renewable resource ("depletion allowance"), but trust me, it's an Oil Mafia.
antimarx: Lol, if you know that there are not pure free market principles in a realistic vision of the U.S. economy, then why are you resistant to a WPT? Instead of avoiding the issue, why not answer your own question: i.e., what "basic market principle" has caused such a sharp increase? If you're going to advance some sort of simplistic supply and demand explanation, let me forewarn you against that silliness. And even if it were that simple, what's wrong with a WPT? Btw, don't be an idiot!!
WPT, AS PROPOSED to be applied to our economy will fail, as has been proven by history and in basic economic theory.
You yourself said it could only stand with a MAJOR overhaul/enforcement of current laws and NEW massive increased centralized government policies.
If you want to discuss the system IN GENERAL that is another discussion. If you want to talk about ways to deal with speculators (for example), or SEC violations,etc.. legislate across the board, not just oil.
anti: you've continually misunderstood the discussion. in fact, the wpt would work just fine. history doesn't "prove" that wpt would fail in this case. even a one semester basic course in econ theory would let you know that you can't draw meaningful inferences from an earlier historical era to apply to a later time because the historical context changes.
Nicholas9999, as opposed to what your ego tells you, your philosophy is an old, tired, and failed one. You can see the end result of massive centralized government and control over the economy.
In using corrupt (close ties) gov as your reason for gov cherry-picking industries one-by-one for massive regulation/take-over, your logic fails when your solution is MORE GOV CONTROL!
anti: In fact, if a broad-based economy is to be reinstated in the country, the central gov't will need to take an appropriate adversarial stance toward extremely large corporations, and the MI complex, etc. This is NOT control, in fact, it is simply a push back against a variety of unhealthy alliances, sweetheart deals, corporate subsidies, etc., that have nothing to do with a healthy vigorous rough and tumble capitalism in the country. But hey, I'm sure you prefer cronyism, lol!!!
Nicholas9999, the END result of your ideology is the failure that we already see in many countries and the historical failure of collapsed civilizations.
People are imperfect regardless if the control is in the hands of gov or citizens. But the best system so far has been capitalism/free-markets/republic.....US.
The primary failures in U.S. can easily be attributed to the creep of socialism and/or so-called progressives using failed Euro/Communism-style gov, such as yourself.
anti: when in doubt, simply make up your opponent's argument, lol !! Does that work with most people?? In fact, the country is heading in the wrong direction and people have started to recognize that. When the middle class is being lost, you can't say that your economic system is a good one. The problem is that there is NOT ENOUGH real capitalism in the country. That can't be solved by allowing the corporate sector and MI complex to own the gov't. But hey, I'm sure you're an Exxon-worshipper.
Republicans aren't dumb...they're just trying to scrape up every dime for themselves before they get kicked out of the white house and the senate. It's not about politics or the people at this point...it's about money...and if you don't think Big Oil has bought every one of the thugs off, think again.
Yup, they're all oil men. Bush, Cheney, & Rice has a freaking Exxon oil tanker named after her. When Bush was young and playing at being a businessman, it was the Saudis who bailed their friend "Bandar Bush" out when he failed. The Oil Ministry was the only building in Iraq protected immediately after the fall of Baghdad. Pages and pages of planning were generated about what to do w/ Iraq's oil after the invasion. It goes on and on - read Greg Palast's Armed Madhouse for a complete primer.
Cenk, have you ever wondered that perhaps the Republicans have been bought out by Big Oil just like how they have been bought up by the health care insurance companies?
Money corrupts. Perhaps they're not that stupid, but they're just corrupt.
brine: on the other hand, he could believe that they're just corrupt and not that stupid, i.e., willing to take the political heat because their alliance with big oil is so tremendously important in terms of funding their elections.
u are brillliant, i wish you had more views, you put up so many videos and they are all good. you should seriously reach out more people to set their morals straight
This has been flagged as spam show
The Oil companies are trying their best to stop free energy ideas from spreading to common ppl.
We need to put an end to this corruption ,start generating your own electricity now.
Visit LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and get the blueprints . Join the Revolution!!
graywackeknifebdr 1 year ago
Why in the Hell do People keep Suporting Big Oil. If they have A Citgo Station in their Town.
hamptonmark 2 years ago
fuck oil companies. foreign and domestic. they're fucking polluting my air, my water and my land. fuck oil companies.
the indians of Lima Peru are my heroes!!
Cenk rocks.
tomitstube 2 years ago 4
They are giving you everything you own except food.
Reqrezentin 2 years ago
say what?!
tomitstube 2 years ago
Oil is everything except food.
Reqrezentin 2 years ago
oil is done. say bye bye oil.
tomitstube 2 years ago
Bye bye, life.
Reqrezentin 2 years ago
yep, you might wanna just kill yourself now oilboy.
tomitstube 2 years ago
Bye Bye, Hippie.
Reqrezentin 2 years ago
Hows this for a shocker its cheaper to make oil than it is to drill for it.and the oil that is made burns much cleaner too
ROBBEDBYBIGOIL 2 years ago
also coal and oil energy can be cleaned up significantly thru expensive filtering processes. not unlike the insurance companies with "real" health care, anything that cuts into the oil co.'s profits is contested by enough money to just go ahead and change.
corporate profits are more important than protecting a planet 6 billion of us currently live on.
tomitstube 2 years ago
More people need to know this !
ROBBEDBYBIGOIL 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Uhg, what a fucking liar. Republicans aren't letting Big Oil "keep ALL their profits." Exxon payed 10s of billions of dollars in tax money.
If you don't like the high gas prices, then blame these fucking liberal retards not letting us drill in ANWR.
Here's the deal liberals, if you want to save the world from Global Warming, then accept the consequences. Otherwise, shut the fuck up and fill your truck.
-Zam
Blasphemangelicals 3 years ago
this guy is a closet lazy stinking asshole who hates work.what the fuck is wrong with his brain,taxing the oil dudes will fuck us all in the ass with high prices!!fucking idiot,pull your head out of your ass motherfucker!!!
sshapewa 3 years ago
Great clip guys. Just about every expert agrees we wouldn't see a single drop of oil for 7-10 years if we ramped up domestic drilling today, and that AT BEST we'd see a decrease in the price of gas of 1-10 cents per gallon.
Encyclopeteia 3 years ago
4. get the govt to persuade detroit to improve gas mileage in new cars. and 5. bring back and make mandatory, the 55 mile speed limit.
oaklynlen 3 years ago
there are 5 ways to bring down prices. 1. CARPOOL. if 5 folks are driven in a car usually driven by 1, there would be 4 less cars on our highways. 2. get the govt. to spend money on MASS TRANSIT. if you make public transportation comfortable, affordable, and attractive you could get many americans out of their cars. 3. get the govt to EXPAND AMTRAK and to 48 states, and call it the national rail system.
oaklynlen 3 years ago
I can see both points of views in either party. I tend to incline a little bit towards approving the drilling here and now until we find other solutions. Together with wind, solar (with incentive & energy buy back program) & nuclear.
Question: Why the democrats do not agree on reducing/getting rid of the gas taxes during the summer time as the republican proposed?. Have you guys found out how much in gas taxes are paid (in percentage) to the govmnt.?
Piantini 3 years ago
Why should we punish the oil companies?They don't control the price of oil, but since the price is so high why shouldn't they take advantage. What if the price of shoes all of the sudden skyrocketed?Would you wan't to all of the sudden tell nike to screw off and give you back some of that money that they earned?Just because somebody took a chance a few of decades ago and started an oil company,not knowing what would happen,turns out that investment was a good one.You want to take that from them?
josephrl82 3 years ago
It's not about the oil. It's about control. It's about keeping us in the dark.
The powers-that-be know that there's plenty of oil, but continuing to use it will eventually kill the planet.
The future is in clean energies like hydrogen, wind and solar. Right now, harnessing those energies is free (can't have that!); and corporations are biding their time (making all the money they can) so that they can figure out a way to own the sun, the wind and the rain.
FriedDaisy 3 years ago
the problem is that we cannot utilize alternative energy and replace our current resources for at least a decade if not a quarter of a century. So we need to drill now so we are not paying 10 to 15 dollars a gallon of gas in 3 years. Forcing our economy to suffer in order to find a more efficient source of energy is just plain moronic. We American's are smart and well find a new way. The fact is: Nothing, so far, is as efficient as oil and naatural gas.
the2006rookie 3 years ago
Last time I checked, solar panels are not illigal. Global warming nuts are more than welcome to go to HomeDepot or Lowes and buy them.
TeamCrusade 3 years ago
You don't like oil companies... get an all electric car or a bicycle and have your house's roof fitted solar panels.
TeamCrusade 3 years ago
what a dick.
repub771 3 years ago
you're an asshole.
dave98503 3 years ago
Most everybody who posted a comment before me appears to be a Republican. I bet most of you or your parents or grandparents are also republican. Indeed, the Republican party has destroyed America. We can still take America back by electing a Democrat this year. You Oil company loving Republicans who dont have a clue whats it like to work for minimum wage have also contributed to the destruction of this Great Country. Our Lord Jesus Christ will always be there to protect us from greedy people.
edwardups 3 years ago
Firs of all, I do not have money. I am a father of two and barely make enough money to get by. Second of all protecting the American Constitution and limiting government cannot be catogorized as destroying America. Democrats want to expand government, give handouts, and dictate a so called free market. WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO WORKING FOR WHAT YOU WANT. THE GOVERNMENT WORKS FOR US WE DON'T WORK FOR THEM. THIS IS THE LAND OF MILK AND HONEY. READ THE CONSTITUTION.
the2006rookie 3 years ago
the founding father's didn't want the gov't to get involved in buisness's maybe you guys should read the constitution.
coltsfancolts 3 years ago
no sir you are absolutely wrong. the founding fathers intended for tariffs to pay govt expenses not income taxes. but the last 20 years we have managed to destroy that notion with free trade and outsourcing.(which is not good for the economy). another note this north american union is unconstitutional.
bigstringuser 3 years ago
This is great. While the Democratic majority bitches about high prices at the pump, what do they do? They vote down a bill to drill in ANWR to gain access to a whole bunch of reserves to perhaps drive DOWN gas prices, and they submit a stupid bill that would just raise costs for oil companies and thus raise costs for consumers. Basic economics would tell anyone this simple fact. Who else is big oil gonna pass these costs onto? They're not take it lying down.
Whoo69 3 years ago
50 to 70 percent already comes from the western hemisphere. north america is already 3rd top producer of crude. only about 25 percent is imported form the middle east. more drilling here will not drive prices down. oversight(which there is none), and requiring futures traders to take possession of the commodities they buy will drive prices down.
bigstringuser 3 years ago
So, Cenk, according to your logic, they were supposed to pass a stupid bill that would've choked oil companies even further, despite all the rules and regulations that make their costs extremely high and make it almost impossible to build new refineries here? That's madness! And for what? For political points?
There are NO record profits! You people are confusing profits with sales. If costs rise, prices rise, but the only way they can have record profits is if they price gouged.
Whoo69 3 years ago
I'm not the biggest friend of corporate America or the oil companies, but the claim that they're making "record profits" is ludicrous. First of all, most people who say this are looking at SALES and revenue, which are very diff. from profits. Profits result from having to pay for costs after you get your revenue. Profits oftentimes are much less than sales, like in Wal-Mart's case. They make 360 billion a year but only get $11 billion in profits.
Whoo69 3 years ago
i believe he is right that the move was dumb politically, yet i do believe that the republicans were correct in killing the bill due to its economic interference...taxing the oil companies isn't the right way to fix the problem, imho.
jrobertsonub 3 years ago
you morons have less than two brain cells
our oil co. work on 8.5% profit less than
almost all big corps. you think taxing our guys so we are less competitive than all
the opec members will help the usa?
this dumb idea was tryed before it was disater
remember the 70s?
gringitx 3 years ago
Remember this on voting day that the Republicans and the Oil companies are one and the same. Vote them all out. A vote for a Republican is a vote for ten dollar a gallon gas.
pongman 3 years ago
We are all in this together.Why don't conservatives ever practice conservation?
EnviroMonster 3 years ago
This guy is an idiot. The Republicans just kept the price of gas lower. If I ran an oil company and I got hit with a windfall tax the first thing I would do is raise my prices to cover the tax. How stupid are the Democrats? The Democrats lead with emotion and over no solutions.
Bellita1 3 years ago
and how would they raise prices? that's called price gouging, and they would be slapped hard on the wrist to do so. the only way gas prices would rise is if oil prices went higher (which are set by the futures market, not the oil companies), or refineries started to shut down or reached max capacity. the oil companies would have no way to raise the price of gas if absurd profits were taken away, that's just a myth told by the oil companies.
talktal 3 years ago
So you are admitting that the Oil Company's aren't price gouging or price fixing. Glad you understand that. Also, the Oil company's aren't the most profitable companies out there when comparing their Revenue with Net Income. There for there shouldn't be a windfall tax.
Bellita1 3 years ago
of course, that's not to say the price of oil isnt being manipulated at the moment, but the oil companies or the president have little fault for that (not to say our president doesnt have blame, there is plenty of that to go around). however, to say they arent the "most profitable" is absurd, as they are making historical figures at the moment. you cant get MORE profitable in terms of actual dollar figures.
talktal 3 years ago
Glad to see you have some clue and don't just blame bush or the oil company's for the situation. I personally think it is the Oil Future Traders that are causeing this along with the turmoil in the middle east. The Oil Co's do have record Dollar Profits. There is no qustion about that but their net income isn't out of line with their revenue. That ratio is what determines a business' profitablity and yes other companies earn more net income on their revenue than Exxon.
Bellita1 3 years ago
I hate to break it to you, but there are no "absurd profits." Profits actually only account for a small portion of revenue. Sure, Exxon made $40 billion one year recently, but that just means their profits were way less, esp. since Wal-Mart makes 360 billion a year but profits are only $11 billion.
The profits really aren't that huge. That's just a Democratic talking point gone wild, to use oil companies as the sole scapegoat for our gas prices problem.
Whoo69 3 years ago
what part of "record profits" do you interpret into "aren't that huge?" And if you are making record profits, you would justify massive subsidies and tax breaks to big oil how? And your solution isn't to reduce our oil addiction by developing alternatives, but to ravage some of the last unspoiled wilderness in this country to keep oil going for another 20 years? When they've already said it wouldn't be online for 7 years, and would add less than 1 percent to available oil?
GretchenDawntreader 3 years ago
I never said I was for subsidies or tax breaks for Big Oil. I hate corporate welfare. But show me which sources you're referring to about ANWR, cuz I'm sure I could show you just as many OTHER sources that say it would be a boon for us. Besides, why not at least try and get some of that oil if there, in fact, is a lot?
Of course alternative energy must be a priority, but that'll take at least a decade, if not more, to get on the ground and ready as normal fuel.
Whoo69 3 years ago
They probably are cashing out as new technologies come up on the horizon.Oil will be less and less consumed as better biofuels and batteries come to market.
upconstruct 3 years ago
Let`em crash and burn!!!!!!!!!!! Im tired of people walkin around like zombies WAKE UP!!
12Annuanki12 3 years ago
This is sparta!!!!
Great reference! funny
Williamkurk 3 years ago
taking away profits is one thing, but there was a clause in that bill that would have made it harder for speculators to enter the market. these investment bankers are screwing EVERYONE again. enough is enough! it's not pure captalism that has failed us, it's america's coperate captalism which will destory the world eocnomy.
talktal 3 years ago
What is your solution for speculators?
The clauses you are referring to are 2 amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act. They would have done it years ago if they were viable amendments, or if they REALLY wanted the change.
Even Dems understand that making specific restrictions to only oil speculators, could have disastrou effects, AND it is difficult to justify applying to only one industry.
Especially an industry that is a cash cow for Dem socialized entitlement programs.
antimarxism 3 years ago
It's rare that I side with a NeoCon, but they are right about this one. We should treat the oil companies as national treasures. You know what the profit margin was at last report for Exxon-Mobil? 11%. If you want more of something, you want it to more profitable than that!
So this maroon is agog because the Republicans didn't pander to people's ignorance properly.
I agree about the subsidies though. Also do away with the 30 billion going to farmers for not growing food. That's scandalous.
JiveDadson 3 years ago
Jive! Your the uncle i never had.
How bout i dust off my old Monopoly game and buy you a beer?
Have you signed up on the new Liberty site?
Woodchuckk 3 years ago
Oh, you betcha I signed up. I was number 74.
JiveDadson 3 years ago
Obama is no different than mccain. they all suck the tit of The warmonger corporate monster radio controlled Frankenstein.
blookup 3 years ago
Obama is a corrupt criminal.
blookup 3 years ago
dummy
fumala420 3 years ago
yeah, and george w bush and his cabinet are innocent angels. douche.
talktal 3 years ago
The big oil companies should spread the wealth. How about having their own gas stations again, hiring people to pump your gas at a living wage.
gocav76 3 years ago
THHHHHISSSS ISSS SPAAAAARRRRTTTTAAAAAAAAAA LOL
Seriously, if the Republicans are running towards a cliff, why would you want to stop them? Let them all jump off and die. Good riddance. I'm not going to warn them about anything or tell them they're doing wrong.
If any Republicans are reading this, know that I am just kidding. There is no cliff. Keep walking. No need to worry now. Just keep going.
iammasterlion 3 years ago 5
You can watch more clips like this at the website the young turks com.
TheYoungTurks 3 years ago
What I've seen the Oil Companies do here in Houston is sickening.
I've owned & operated my own company & a major objective was to keep costs down.
But I've seen the oil companies down here throw lavish parties where they pick people up in limos, spend ridiculous amounts, give unbelievable bonuses & raises & retirement packages of many tens of thousands, let some Exec retire with a bonus + benefits totaling about $500,000,000.00.
They do this so their profits seem less obscene.
DillonX 3 years ago
Please tell me what a tax on "big oil" would do for us. Is that going to increase producion? No. What we need to do is increase production by allowing drilling in AK and off the coast of CA and FL.
He's more worried with "political stragegy" and how Republicans "might look" than he is with really solving a problem. Basic economics people...to lower prices, quantity must go up. My suggestion would be to take a basic economics course and then discuss the issue before you make yourself look
tifozey 3 years ago
"What we need to do is increase production by allowing drilling in AK and off the coast of CA and FL."
Major talking point which overlooks the lack of oversight and irresponsible leadership that got us into the situation. Address the problems that got us here and then implement solutions. Otherwise you will perpetuate the same mindset which caused the problems.
metavoice 3 years ago 2
the billions of dollars could be used for research into renewable sources , subsidies for alternative energy, and job creation in greener energy fields. look at china, the people there only pay $3 a gallon because the government can flip the bill for the rest since they're smart enough not to waste half their budget on war and occupation of countries around the globe.
talktal 3 years ago
It's not a fight we can win. Whatever rules we come up with they will keep fleecing the American public no matter what because they control they oil which we need.
It would be nice if these guys developed a bit of a social conscience but it's a company not a person, you can't really expect them to have human feelings. If they have to choose between going green and seriously denting their profits or making a cheap ad to appear green, that's an easy choice.
megamarsvin 3 years ago
Yes, Erato99, the government legally taxes companies. What is going on that the big oil companies are making this much money when we can barely afford their product? Where is this money coming from and where is it going? It needs to be regulated so they can't feel free to price gouge the American people and walk away with billions in profit.
macman851 3 years ago
Forgive me if I don't understand correctly, but is this guy think that the government should just go into the oil businesses and take their money (illegal)? Or just tax the shit out of big oil, because then they will definitely lower gas prices, right? Tell Congress to let us use our own oil reserves to lower prices while we find an alternative fuel. Besides, the Chinese are already drilling just outside our borders.
erato99 3 years ago
It is part of congress's job to exercise oversight in such cases and windfall profits should raise suspicion. By the way, conservative ideologues under Reagan/Bush used tax reforms as a way to cut social programs. Bush has taken this approach one step further, subsidizing big business even when it pinches the average American and then crying about the need for off-shore drilling (major talking point). It is basically the same philosophy.
metavoice 3 years ago
Bush is so good he double the gas price by 4 years!!Bush is so good the Iraq war went longer the world war II!! who ever vote for Bush you just got served and you are dumb ass
TGFTH 3 years ago 7
It doesn't matter. There are no implications for the Republicans until the Democrats have a veto-proof majority. The electoral map favors the Republicans so much that winning the presidency is HIGHLY unlikely. The Republicans know this, so they're just doing what they want, regardless of how unpopular it is because they know that, as long as McCain wins (and he probably will, since he's polling strong in Florida), they can keep things deadlocked, retaining the status quo. They're pretty cynical.
ryanmuegge 3 years ago
I agree. Republicans have ways to win this election that we haven't even seen yet. I don't see the GOP handing over power in January.
Wendy62 3 years ago
I like that you distinguished between a filibuster and a vote against the bill. I feel that the Republicans have been given a complete pass with their use of the filibuster- by the media simply characterizing it as "opposition" instead of a last-resort, progress-stopping action- and by the Democrats, for not forcing them to filibuster for any significant length of time, exposing their tactics to public scrutiny.
WittyPsuedonym 3 years ago
I like how you label an already historically proven-to-fail-miserably "Windfall Profits Tax" as "progress".
Democrats have also used the filibuster and the media has also categorized it as "opposition".
antimarxism 3 years ago
Cenk, I usually agree with you but I think taxing these oil companies is a great idea. You see, these oil companies are making a profit off of something America NEEDS!!! Now, if they were providing a service like Microsoft Windows then I could understand not taxing them for insane profits.
But farmers need gas to harvest crops, truckers need gas to deliver goods to the market place, etc.
No one NEEDS Windows Vista. They can go with Mac or whatever.
swaggajee 3 years ago
Good point on the oil companies making a profit on something we all need!
Wendy62 3 years ago
Um, hello! That's how this country works. Would you like to work without pay? Didn't think so. Maybe WalMart shouldn't make a profit either... I mean, we all need toilet paper, don't we. Come on people... get smart.
tifozey 3 years ago
I don't think anyone is arguing that "Big Oil" can't make a profit.
metavoice 3 years ago
Did you really expect the Corporate Fascist would do otherwise?
dragon8me2 3 years ago
Exxon Mobil RECORD profits by year
ExxonMobil $39.5 2006 billion
ExxonMobil $40.6 2007 billion
ExxonMobil $36.1 2005
ExxonMobil $25.3 2004
Stay informed people. Do not listen to these politicians, legislators. Do your research. Turn the tv off and look at Congressional voting records, read historical accounts by their aides, look at which taxes go to what. Just looking at what bills pass and their language will give you lots of real information.
subzeromind 3 years ago
You think 8.3% average annual profit is high?
Yep, stay informed people!
antimarxism 3 years ago 2
ExxonMobil 07
Revenue $404.6 B
Profit $40.6 B (10.0%)
Taxes $102.5 B (25.3%)
antimarxism 3 years ago
You think 8.3% average annual profit is high? Take a look at Apple, Microsoft, Walmart, etc..
ConocoPhillips 07
Revenue $194.5 B
Profit $11.9 B (6.1%)
Taxes $30.4 B(15.6%)
antimarxism 3 years ago
Chevron 07
Revenue $220.9 B
Profit $18.7 B (8.5%)
Taxes $35.7 B (16.2%)
antimarxism 3 years ago
Marathon 07
Revenue $62.8 B
Profit $4.0 B (6.3%)
Taxes $8.5 B (13.5%)
Stay informed people!
antimarxism 3 years ago
when you're talking about PROFITS in the tens of billions, talking about percentage is no longer valid.
talktal 3 years ago
"RockinRowdyRufus (5 hours ago)
Republicans aren't dumb...they're just trying to scrape up every dime for themselves before they get kicked out of the white house and the senate..."
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Lynnianaa 3 years ago
Holy fucking hell @ 3:39 - 3:58
Lynnianaa 3 years ago
The Republican party is collapsing like a New York City crane.
Richardgwm 3 years ago
"This is Sparta....ooops" that look on Cenk's face gave me an epic LOL.
eirefrance 3 years ago
antimarxism is right. On Sunday at Church, I will arrange to perform a collection for the Oil Companies and see how many people donate.
Of course the Oil companies keep all of the profits - if they didn't keep it, it wouldn't be considered a profit.
And I get the difference between Gross and Net profits, so go suck down on some more caviar before you reply.
mathman233 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
How dumb is this YoungTurk idiot to actually say that oil companies keep ALL of their profits?
Obama just stated today that he would like gas prices to go up, just not too fast. Bloomberg said that gas prices should go up so consumers will stop using as much gas. McCain himself is FOR windfall profits taxing, cap/trade, etc... along with a few Republicans.
Democrats and many Republicans want gas prices to go HIGHER! They KNOW that WPT raises gas prices and decreases tax revenue.
antimarxism 3 years ago
What oil company do you work for?
saully1966 3 years ago
Saully1966, what exactly do you disagree with? Be specific.
And BTW, which campaign do you sockpuppet for?
antimarxism 3 years ago
Not to nitpick but can you show me where you found that about Obama?
jotunobsidianeyes 3 years ago
I don't think I can post links, so just copy/paste this in YT search: "Obama: Higher Oil Prices Are Good? What???"
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
According to Barack Obama, high gas prices don't really constitute a problem for Americans. He stated yesterday that the reason for our anger is the rapid increase in prices, not the prices themselves.
antimarxism 3 years ago
This is not dumb on part of the Republicans. The oil companies are what puts food on their table. If they don't act in the favor of the oil company, they might be hurt in other ways.
TheBlindWatchmaker 3 years ago 2
If you tell oil companies that they won't be able to keep their profits past a certain point (Windfall Profits Tax), they'll make money right up until that point, and then they'll stop.
antimarxism 3 years ago
On average US oil companies make 8.3% profit.
ExxonMobil 2007
Revenue $404.6 Billion
Profit $40.6 Billion (10.0%)
Taxes $102.5 Billion (25.3%)
ConocoPhillips 2007
Revenue $194.5 Billion
Profit $11.9 Billion (6.1%)
Taxes $30.4 Billion (15.6%)
AFTER those profits are paid to shareholders, income tax is collected on that amount AGAIN.
antimarxism 3 years ago
Microsoft 2007 - 14 Billion profit AFTER taxes.
We can also discuss Walmart, Apple, etc.. if you like.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: Money transfer are what are taxed under the U.S. tax system. That is the way the tax system works. The way to solve the problem is to cease all taxation of corporations and tax LT capital gains as ordinary income. That would aid in the creation of an adversarial posture of gov't toward the corporate sector overall.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Fine, an overhaul of the system as we know it has nothing to do with only installing a WPT AS PROPOSED by Dems and promoted by this video.
You, from the beginning, have been attempting to argue a point that hasn't been brought up by gov at this point.
Your fantasy of massive overhauls and massive increases of centralized government is no more insightful than Ron Paul pushing for a return to gold standard.
The topic "WTP" imposed on oil companies, TODAY.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: For some reason, you seem to be focusing on my statements about other fixes to the current economic mess as if those statements undercut the fact that a wpt would work fine. If you want to try to disingenuously muddle the argument, I suppose that's one way to avoid the fact that there's not a single shred of evidence to say a wpt wouldn't work just fine. There's no reason to reward Big Oil for profits it's reaping that have nothing to do with good management, innovation, etc.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
This is way to beat John McCain and the GOP. Read EVERY little thing that he and they voted for that was against assisting the American people in economic troubles
You do that and you're golden
GerardMontague 3 years ago
Uhh...not to nitpick here, but..the spartans didn't all die. Just 300 of them, there was still 10,000 of them at the end of the movie...and then didn't run off a cliff...they sort of got flanked and arrowed to death....I'm a nerd.
odditynerds 3 years ago
...win
notscooter952 3 years ago
Windfall Profits Tax has been tried before.
Here are the results:
1. Domestic oil production decreased 8%
2. Imports increased 16%
3. Tax Revenues decreased
4. Jobs dependent on oil and gas were cut
5. Gas prices increased
6. Investments associated decreased
7. Previous gas shortage continued
antimarxism 3 years ago
@ antimarxism:
Your list can be explained very easily: the oil companies produced less oil and raised taxes to increase demand and make up for what they lost to taxation. And it was they, not the government, that cut all those jobs, to further maximize profit. It's not the government or the policy that caused these issues, but the gree of Big Oil.
vaderwalks 3 years ago
Vaderwalks, you didn't provide an explanation, you simply repeated the results (I mentioned) of the previously attempted Windfall Profits Tax. Which will soon to be repeated.
BTW, if you label "greed" as 8.3% profit, then you've labeled MANY companies as "greedy".
And also BTW, all taxes get passed on to consumers and investors (including your 401K and such). This is a fact. Accept it.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: In fact, his explanation made a lot of sense. Nor do you even know that based on the previous history you mention, that those same outcomes would occur. They might or might not. A WPT plus a vigorous enforcement of antitrust laws particularly against vertical integration, and against any further large oil company mergers, would be useful. Investigating whether speculation is being purposely engaged in in order to prompt, e.g., ANWAR exploration, would be good.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
nicholas9999, raising margin requirements for stocks is a seperate issue, enforcing current laws is a seperate issue, etc...
The historical effects of WPT prove basic economic facts.
Your simply convoluting a simple discussion by mixing seperate components to falsely prove a mythical point.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: Lol, are you university-educated? Didn't think so. "The historical effects of WPT prove basic economic facts." The history of WPT is too sparse to prove anything, lol. I'm "mixing separate components," as you put it, because economic outcomes are NEVER based on one factor alone. The economy is an extremely complex piece of machinery, involving a whole host of factors, including investor psychology, just to name one that is almost unquantifiable.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
The discussion and video was about Republicans blocking a specific proposal, WPT.
I'm not sure why you want to convolute what has been proposed (WPT) with what YOU are proposing (changing numerous other factors), hence your "mythical" proposal that doesn't exist.
So far you seem to be the prime example of a semi-educated bonehead that can't see the forest for the trees.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: As for: "I'm not sure why you want to convolute what has been proposed (WPT) with what YOU are proposing" You have continually made over-simplistic statements regarding the effects of a WPT. I have replied to those assertions by showing that things don't work that way, that in fact, there are any number of other factors that have effects on possible outcomes. In other words, you're wrong, you can't rely on a sparse historical record, etc. Go take an ECON course, please.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
antimarx: (2) But, apart from the workings of the economy, let's go one step further. I sense you don't want a "socialistic" oil industry (or economy in general). But this isn't about the general economy nor a "free market principle." Rather it is about cronyism between a president and his fam who have had close ties to the oil biz for like 90 years.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Politicians have "close ties" to most any aspect of the economy. Gore has made millions on carbon credit schemes, Obama has a history of "close ties" to his quick "rise" to power (and will have many socialized paypacks), the list goes on and on.
Who the hell isn't invested in oil in one way or the other?
God, you are dense.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: "Politicians have 'close ties' to most any aspect of the economy." I'm afraid you have simply lost your footing here. You're trying to dilute the argument with some sort of new meaning for "close ties." In fact, reasonable people understand the meaning of close and distant, proximal and distal. The Bush family has been in the oil biz forever.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
I would never defend BUSH, I despise his politics. BUT you attempting to single him out as more relevant to the economy is remarkably dumb.
It is not ones actual "ties" it is the power and control they have on you. Obama is a perfect example of being controlled like a puppet from the beginning of his career to present by special interests.
Obama attempting to lessen the perception of that is only politics.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: Lol, it's hard to imagine that Bush would NOT have significant influence over many aspects of responses to high oil prices. He's got direct connections to those folks and certainly it is in his personal interest to prevent them from losing any profits. All politicians are somewhat "connected," but Obama's are fairly sparse, nothing like Bush and Cheney, and their tremendous involvement in contruction, oil tool mfg, oil exploration, etc. There's no comparison.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
antimarx: (2) Samuel Prescott Bush, great-grandfather of G.W. Bush, became prominent in the oil tool biz. Later, his grandson, George H. W. Bush became a millionaire in the oil biz in West Texas, later moving Zapata Oil co. to Houston, the center of the oil biz in Texas. James Baker, a key advisor to the Bush family sits on the board of Exxon, as an example.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
antimarx: (3) I.e., the Bush fam are closely connected to the oil biz and to oil tool mfr's. As such, G W. Bush, along with Cheney, have been able to favor their friends, and, in general, to act in the best interests of Big Oil. That is, again, the game is fixed by virtue of favoritism, cronyism, etc., something for which the Bush admin has become well-known.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Of course politicians work in their own best interest. It is a corrupt system. Singling out Bush is moronic.
All of these corrupt politicians want to keep the US supply low on oil. It is that simple. Democrats and republicans are on the environmental carbon credit scheme which is lining their pockets as we speak.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: Actually, singling out Bush is sensible and ignoring the obvious is naive. The guy would be in the dock if it were not for the fact he's more useful politically as an unindicted crook who is twisting in the wind! Access to oil spigots in Iraq was one of the reasons for the invasion, and the desirability of that access was on Bush's mind _before_ 911. The scenario being played out is somewhat like that of Aramco in Saudi Arabia; i.e., we're after the oil concessions.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Here we go, "WAR FOR OIL!!!"
Another one of those idiots.
And let me guess, 911 was an inside job, right?
You moron, I almost decided early on not to educate you, but continued the schooling. Now I realize you are a "war for oil" and "inside job" nutjob, and realize there is no way to fix you.
Get a job/education/life/etc.., and get back to me.
antimarxism 3 years ago
anti: you're starting to go over the edge again. If you had confined your remarks to oil instead of jumping into a 911 rant, then you would have an argument. The war was entered into for a variety of reasons, a big one of which was being able to get those oil concessions, as we once had in Saudi Arabia. Greenspan talked about this in his book. And in fact, the doc Bush's War talks about the competition between the neocons and big oil people when the war was being planned. don't be so naive.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
antimarx: (3) I.e., what you've got NOW is NOT a free-market process - it's a fixed game. It is highly likely that speculators in cahoots with big oil have bid up oil prices so that American legislators are much more likely to approve ANWAR drilling, etc. I don't like conspiracy theories, but no one can quite figure out why oil should shoot up like it has; the Chinese are expanding, but not quite that fast. So, don't fall for the arguments against a WPT - those profits are ill-gotten gains.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Peak oil; oil production is falling in practically all fields, including Ganwar and Mexico's supergiant field (can't remember the name, but it's the second largest field in the world).
Speculation definitely plays a large role, but oil is a limited resource, and production is falling. Look up "peak oil" for some startling info.
Muaguana 3 years ago
muag: Appreciate the comment, but I just don't believe in peak oil, at least any time soon. There are bazillions of barrels of oil in reserves under Iraq and Iran. As time passes, there are new technologies for extraction that were not available even 20 years ago. Oil companies have always pleaded for special treatment because they search for a non-renewable resource ("depletion allowance"), but trust me, it's an Oil Mafia.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
There have never been PURE free-markets in the US, nor PURE capitalism, etc..
Did you have some sort of epiphony and come up with that one? OR was it a community college class the other day?
If you don't understand why oil prices have increased at the rate they have, then you may want to retake the few econ classes you obviously failed.
Good God, I'm not going to sit here and school you on basic market principles.
antimarxism 3 years ago
antimarx: Lol, if you know that there are not pure free market principles in a realistic vision of the U.S. economy, then why are you resistant to a WPT? Instead of avoiding the issue, why not answer your own question: i.e., what "basic market principle" has caused such a sharp increase? If you're going to advance some sort of simplistic supply and demand explanation, let me forewarn you against that silliness. And even if it were that simple, what's wrong with a WPT? Btw, don't be an idiot!!
nicholas9999 3 years ago
WPT, AS PROPOSED to be applied to our economy will fail, as has been proven by history and in basic economic theory.
You yourself said it could only stand with a MAJOR overhaul/enforcement of current laws and NEW massive increased centralized government policies.
If you want to discuss the system IN GENERAL that is another discussion. If you want to talk about ways to deal with speculators (for example), or SEC violations,etc.. legislate across the board, not just oil.
antimarxism 3 years ago
anti: you've continually misunderstood the discussion. in fact, the wpt would work just fine. history doesn't "prove" that wpt would fail in this case. even a one semester basic course in econ theory would let you know that you can't draw meaningful inferences from an earlier historical era to apply to a later time because the historical context changes.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Nicholas9999, as opposed to what your ego tells you, your philosophy is an old, tired, and failed one. You can see the end result of massive centralized government and control over the economy.
In using corrupt (close ties) gov as your reason for gov cherry-picking industries one-by-one for massive regulation/take-over, your logic fails when your solution is MORE GOV CONTROL!
antimarxism 3 years ago
anti: In fact, if a broad-based economy is to be reinstated in the country, the central gov't will need to take an appropriate adversarial stance toward extremely large corporations, and the MI complex, etc. This is NOT control, in fact, it is simply a push back against a variety of unhealthy alliances, sweetheart deals, corporate subsidies, etc., that have nothing to do with a healthy vigorous rough and tumble capitalism in the country. But hey, I'm sure you prefer cronyism, lol!!!
nicholas9999 3 years ago
Nicholas9999, the END result of your ideology is the failure that we already see in many countries and the historical failure of collapsed civilizations.
People are imperfect regardless if the control is in the hands of gov or citizens. But the best system so far has been capitalism/free-markets/republic.....US.
The primary failures in U.S. can easily be attributed to the creep of socialism and/or so-called progressives using failed Euro/Communism-style gov, such as yourself.
antimarxism 3 years ago
anti: when in doubt, simply make up your opponent's argument, lol !! Does that work with most people?? In fact, the country is heading in the wrong direction and people have started to recognize that. When the middle class is being lost, you can't say that your economic system is a good one. The problem is that there is NOT ENOUGH real capitalism in the country. That can't be solved by allowing the corporate sector and MI complex to own the gov't. But hey, I'm sure you're an Exxon-worshipper.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
man I hate the republicans. This once great party has become total trash. I mean what happened to them Ronald Reagon or even before him?
glddraco 3 years ago
Republicans aren't dumb...they're just trying to scrape up every dime for themselves before they get kicked out of the white house and the senate. It's not about politics or the people at this point...it's about money...and if you don't think Big Oil has bought every one of the thugs off, think again.
RockinRowdyRufus 3 years ago 8
Yup, they're all oil men. Bush, Cheney, & Rice has a freaking Exxon oil tanker named after her. When Bush was young and playing at being a businessman, it was the Saudis who bailed their friend "Bandar Bush" out when he failed. The Oil Ministry was the only building in Iraq protected immediately after the fall of Baghdad. Pages and pages of planning were generated about what to do w/ Iraq's oil after the invasion. It goes on and on - read Greg Palast's Armed Madhouse for a complete primer.
FeelFreeToArgue 3 years ago
Cenk, have you ever wondered that perhaps the Republicans have been bought out by Big Oil just like how they have been bought up by the health care insurance companies?
Money corrupts. Perhaps they're not that stupid, but they're just corrupt.
grapplerke 3 years ago 2
Have you ever wondered that he perhaps believes they're both corrupt AND dumb? Don't be such an idiot next time.
Brine49 3 years ago
brine: on the other hand, he could believe that they're just corrupt and not that stupid, i.e., willing to take the political heat because their alliance with big oil is so tremendously important in terms of funding their elections.
nicholas9999 3 years ago
u are brillliant, i wish you had more views, you put up so many videos and they are all good. you should seriously reach out more people to set their morals straight
Paraz1tul 3 years ago